To each his own I guess. Superman was never that big of a deal here in the Netherlands, so the Superman stories I saw Cavill in were perfect for my personal tastes.
Don't worry, in a couple years when they're looking for 'cheaper' content someone at HBOMAX will bring up the fact that they ahev a film that has its principal photography 100% finished; and they'll spring for completing the Post Production and release it as some 'special cut' version. As soon as one of their DCEU theatrical releases doesn't perform to expectations, they'll be scrambling the '10 year plan' and looking for ways to boost profits by other means.
What happens if someone else buys WBD? Would they be subject to the same restriction? That's how these vulture capitalists work, right? Drive a company into the ground to squeeze as many fast bucks from it as they can, then sell it off and move on to their next victim?
Sure, if you want to trigger a complete audit of your multi billion dollar conglomerate by the IRS and whatever other regulatory bodies that might be interested, have to pay back the initial deductions plus penalties and interests, fines, possible tax fraud charges, possible SEC investigations, and a potential shareholder rebellion over all of the above. Over a direct to streaming Batgirl movie. The question becomes, would it make enough money back to counter all of that? And all the added expense of finishing and releasing it? Yeah, they can't just change the previous ownerships tax decisions from years ago. Could 20 years from now some new ownership team cut a deal with the IRS to release it anyway? Maybe. Maybe the tax code will change. Who knows. Anything is possible. But all this talk of it being either a cynical plot to increase interest or some other version of "They'll just release it in a couple years as a special event" isn't realistic. The biggest limiting factor I see to all this is, we aren't talking a lost Orson Welles film. It's a direct to streaming Batgirl movie. The whole debacle will probably pop up in top ten lists online for the next 50 years but I just don't ever seeing there being the demand for it to overcome the obstacles Movies get buried frequently enough.
Name the last moderately budgeted superhero movie to get buried after principal photography was completed? This doesn't happen "frequently enough". (Suppose we can include Roger Corman's FF, but that was done for the cheap from the get-go and, incidentally, has an official release date now on D+ in 2 years) But they're only going to release quality now. So long as the lead is a white male...
Well I assume they'll have reshoots for Shazam 2 that they couldn't afford for Batgirl, which was a streaming release.
I said movies get buried frequently enough as a statement reflecting it's not unprecedented for completed movies to never, ever see the light of day. I did not say it's common for "moderately budgeted superhero movie to get buried after principal photography was completed". I have already said many, many times that whole situation seems unprecedented in film studio mergers, just not in corporate mergers in other industries.
The SEC is probably already looking at them closely with what is going on. Incurring the wrath of the IRS is not the best idea when they are already on shaky financial ground. The numbers don't add up for the risk.
Hey, they've got "Blue Beetle! *checks Zaslav's comments naming all the great DC Movies they have coming out* Bugger.
So, something I was thinking - since they did a test release of Batgirl, that means a functional work print DOES exist, somewhere. Anonymous hackers - get on it!
Not really. In the past ten years I can't think of any (other) completed films that got shelved. There was "The King's Daughter" but that came out eventually. Going back to the decade before you've got "Empires of the Deep" and "Hippie Hippie Shake". So that's two in twenty years; not including ones that didn't finish shooting because the money ran out or because they'd cast Kevin Spacey at exactly the wrong time.
So... That would be two precedents you remembered off the top of your head and posted in a reply trying to disprove a post saying it's not without precedent?
I was afraid of that. It's the permanence of this decision that makes it so damned evil. "I want to get infinitesimally richer than I already am, so I'll make sure that nobody ever gets to see this thing they were looking forward to." It's obscenely selfish. You don't have to belittle what this movie is just to make your point about the impossibility of its release. A superhero movie with an Afro-Latina lead would've meant something important to a lot of people -- not to mention the fact that it would've been the screen debut of the character of Alysia Yeoh, which would've been a big step forward for transgender representation in superhero movies. Losing that sucks, and losing it irreversibly sucks even worse.
You claimed it happened frequently. Twice in 20 years is hardly frequently. Feel free to prove me wrong and name all the ones I missed.